Christian Heimes added the comment:
Serhiy, the performance of hash() for long strings isn't very relevant for the
general performance of a Python program. Short strings dominate. I've modified
the timeit to create a new string object every time.
for I in 5 10 15 20 30 40 50 60; do echo -ne "$I\t"; ./python -m timeit
-n100000 -r30 -s "h = hash; x = 'รค' * $I" -- "h(x + 'a')" | awk '{print $6}' ;
done
ASCII:
# SIP FNV
5 0.112 0.0979
10 0.115 0.103
15 0.12 0.107
20 0.124 0.112
30 0.126 0.127
40 0.136 0.142
50 0.142 0.147
60 0.146 0.159
UCS-2:
# SIP FNV
5 0.114 0.0977
10 0.117 0.0988
15 0.12 0.11
20 0.126 0.109
30 0.13 0.122
40 0.14 0.132
50 0.144 0.147
60 0.152 0.157
For short strings the additional round and setup costs make hash() about 10%
slower. For long strings SIP is faster as it processes 8 bytes at once instead
of 1 to 4 bytes.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue14621>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
